Dear Bui,
You propose the following definition:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel is
the best decision but which they can all live with, support, and
commit themselves to not undermine - arrived at without voting,
through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all members
feel that they have been adequately heard, in which everyone has
equal power and responsibility, and different degrees of influence
by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are avoided, so
that all are satisfied with the process.”
May I suggest a slight amendment, adding the two words ‘with or’,
as follows:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel is
the best decision but which they can all live with, support, and
commit themselves to not undermine - arrived atwith or without
voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all
members feel that they have been adequately heard, in which
everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees
of influence by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are
avoided, so that all are satisfied with the process.”
And a voting process in which “everyone has equal power” is, may I
further suggest (as in my original splurb), a consensus vote, a
multi-option preference vote, a Modified Borda Count.
Just because some voting procedures are so dreadful – probably the
worst is the two-option majority vote – does not mean that all
voting procedures are bad.
Peter
Peter Emerson
www.deborda.org
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Harrison Owen
Sent: 15 August 2008 20:30
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
I quite like what Scott Peck says, although when you read it, it
sounds like very hard work, something which can be achieved only
occasionally and under special circumstances. I wonder whether the
truth is rather different. Indeed I might suggest that the vast
majority of decisions made in any group or organization occur by
consensus. There is no argument, no great discussion, “it” whatever
it was, just seemed like the right thing to do – and that is what
happened. Somewhere along the line we came to the notion that
decision is always a matter of formal action, constrained by rules
and procedure. This certainly seems to be the reality in a number
of organizations – which I find totally claustrophobic! Probably
just me – but my experience is that the essence of life is
deciding. Most of the time it just sort of flows. But there are
certainly times when it gets bumpy and hard and most usually that
happens when I try to force things. Crazy?
Harrison
Harrison Owen
189 Beaucaire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207-763-3261 (Summer)
301-365-2093 (Winter)
Website www.openspaceworld.com
Personal Website www.ho-image.com
OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Bui Petersen
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 1:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
I have been absent from this list for a rather long time. Life has
intervened again (I have just moved from Vancouver to St. John's,
Newfoundland) and kept me away from anything to do with Open Space.
But the discussion on consensus makes me come out from hiding.
Harrison, I agree with much of what you say. However, I think the
difficulty with any discussion on consensus is that everybody has a
different interpretation of what "consensus" means. The way I see
it, consensus is not something you come at easily. Reaching what I
consider to be true consensus requires a process that gives plenty
of space for disagreements to be voiced. If a solution can be found
that everyone believes is the best and most reasonable
(considering the alternatives), and that everyone is willing to
support, that could be considered consensus. It requires a lot of
time and effort and is not always practical or even desirable.
What irritates me the most is when people talk about consensus as
if it only means a strong majority, as in "8 out of 10 support this
options; it looks like we have consensus. A more common problem,
however, is that people suppress their disagreement in order to not
be seen as "difficult".
The most thorough definition of consensus that I have come across is:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel is
the best decision but which they can all live with, support, and
commit themselves to not undermine - arrived at without voting,
through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all members
feel that they have been adequately heard, in which everyone has
equal power and responsibility, and different degrees of influence
by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are avoided, so
that all are satisfied with the process. The process requires the
members to be emotionally present and engaged; frank in a loving,
mutually respectful manner; sensitive to each other; to be
selfless, dispassionate, and capable of emptying themselves; and
possessing a paradoxical awareness of both people and time,
including knowing when the solution is satisfactory, and that it is
time to stop and not re-open the discussion until such time that
the group determines a need for revision." [© 1988, Valley
Diagnostic, Medical, and Surgical Clinic, Inc. of Harlingen, Texas
and the Foundation for Community Encouragement, Knoxville,
Tennessee] (as quoted by M. Scott Peck).
My two cents.
Bui
Harrison Owen wrote:
Peter – Tyranny by the majority is certainly a downside of
Democracy as practiced in my country (USA). That said, it seems to
me that there are circumstances where it is the preferable
alternative. The passage of the Civil Rights Act here in the US was
vociferously and often violently opposed by a very vocal minority,
however I would doubt that many black Americans opposed the
vigorous enforcement of that act, and fortunately (for the good of
the country) a majority of all Americans, regardless of hue, were
in agreement.
Consensus politics has much to commend it, but it too has its
downsides. Resolution at the lowest common denominator is one such,
which often appears to be no resolution at all. Alternatively, the
whole system may simply become paralyzed. At such times, I for one
find myself longing for a straight up or down vote. There is also
such a thing a Tyranny of Consensus, I think.
Perhaps it is useful to think in terms of both/and as opposed to
either/or? For example, Majority Rule, as in the case of the Civil
Rights act, was possible only because of a prior consensus in the
American Population that the Rule of Law was to be preferred even
if you were on the wrong side of the Law.
I suspect that the situation is infinitely more complicated than
the simple alternative (Consensus/Majority Rule). My learning has
been that our capacity to design and implement effective systems of
all sorts (political, corporate, etc) is limited at best. We simply
cannot comprehend the infinite complexity and random occurrences
(essential chaos), characteristic of all living systems. Our
solutions are always approximations, and try as we might, we will
never get it “right” – and for sure we will never be in control.
This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t keep trying, but I think it is
essential that we understand the true status of our creations –
they are maps, and never to be confused with the territory. Like
all maps, some are better than others, and as conditions change
these maps become more or less relevant/accurate.
We really get in trouble when we decide that there is “One Right
Way.” This effectively limits our options and reduces the living
space (open space). Pushed to extremes the system will die – which
is the end state of all systems, regardless. When you run out of
space/time you run out of life. Fortunately our maps do not create
the systems, and our systems are infinitely more robust than our
designs could ever be. Are they perfect? No. They are always on the
way to something new. And if they ever get “there” that will be the
end, I think.
Harrison
Harrison Owen
189 Beaucaire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207-763-3261 (Summer)
301-365-2093 (Winter)
Website www.openspaceworld.com
Personal Website www.ho-image.com
OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Peter Emerson
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:21 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
Dear Jack,
They key, then, is to ask these folks, do they believe in
democracy? Yes? Oh jolly good. And do they believe democracy is
for everybody, or just a majority? And if they agree to the
former, away you go.
Mediation works only when the parties to the dispute agree to it.
Democracy should work for all democrats. Russians and Georgians
claim the adjective. But the idea that a majority can determine
the fate of an unwilling minority should be abhorrent… to both.
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Emerson
Director, The de Borda Institute
36 Ballysillan Road
Belfast BT14 7QQ
028 90 711795
078 377 17979
[email protected]
www.deborda.org
The Borda count "is the best protection ever devised from the
tyranny of the majority." Professor Sir Michael Dummett.
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Jack Martin Leith
Sent: 14 August
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
Peter,
Thanks for taking the trouble to explain the method in so much
detail. I've turned your post into a Word document and filed it
under Decision Making Methods for future reference.
The challenge is getting people's agreement to use the method.
Catch-22!
Warm wishes,
Jack
Jack Martin Leith
Now-to-New activist
Bristol, United Kingdom
Mobile: 07831 840541 (+44 7831 840541)
Skype: jackmartinleith
email: [email protected]
www.jackmartinleith.com
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists andOSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1611 - Release Date:
8/14/2008 6:20 AM
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists andOSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ==========================================================osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]:http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1614 - Release Date:
8/15/2008 5:29 PM
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
